3 ms·
This strikes me as bizarre: > A crowdsourcing campaign to cover the restitution has raised $330,000 -- more than double what Lewis owes. But Lewis' attorneys m
by mwint 4y ago
This strikes me as bizarre:
> A crowdsourcing campaign to cover the restitution has raised $330,000 -- more than double what Lewis owes. But Lewis' attorneys must determine whether Iowa law would allow the donated money to be used to pay the restitution
If I owe someone $150,000 and I have $330,000, how exactly can I be prevented from using it to pay?
Even if you prevent me from using it, why can’t I buy a $300k house in cash and then take a $150k mortgage? Sell the house three months later.
- b409ba0801cd21 4y agohttps://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/910.3B.pdf https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/910.3B.pdf Perhaps there is a concern that the croudfunds could be considered a third party payment under subsection 4. The only explanation that I can think of for the subsection was to prevent a defendant from claiming that a source like the decedent's own life insurance should be counted against the restitution, but that seems a bit far fetched.